MANGAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners have come up in revision against the order of the additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, which is a matter of moment for them in the trial they are facing under Section 302/34, Indian Penal Code. It appears that on a police report and subsequent commitment, the petitioners, standing trial, were confronted with the evidence of six P. Ws. recorded. When the remaining evidence of the prosecution to supply them statements of witnesses recorded by the police subsequent to the presentation of the challan. It transpires that the investigation, despite putting up the case in court for trial kept further investigation the matter as permissible under sub -section (8) of section 173, Cr.P.C. However, the investigation has not so far forwarded to the Court a further report or reports regarding such evidence in the form prescribed. Thus, in terms thereof the provisions of sub sections (2) of (6) of section 173, Cr.P.C. have not come to play their part. Sub -section (5) thereof requires that when a police report is in respect of a case to which see 170 applies, the police officer shall forward to the Magistrate along with the report the statements recorded under Section 161 of all the persons whom the prosecution proposes to examine as its witnesses. Further, section 162, Cr.P.C. provides for a regulated use of statements under Section 161, Cr.P.C., but only when a witness is called for the prosecution in such enquiry or trial whose statement has been recorded in writing during investigation. The purposes of section 162, Cr.P.C., are otherwise well -known.

(2.) HERE , the petitioners claim that the statements of witnesses supposedly recoded in further investigation, which have not seen the day in the Court, should be supplied to them for the purpose of contradicting the witnesses under Section 145 Indian Evidence Act. This claim of the petitioners seems to me totally misplace. Further investigation has not led to the formation of a report to which subsequent statements of witnesses under Section 161, Cr.P.C., need have to be appended. Unless that stand is taken, those statement cannot qualify to be used under Section 162, Cr.P.C. That being the situation, the claim of the petitioners cannot be entertained and no such direction can given to the investigation.

(3.) ACCORDINGLY this petition fails and is hereby dismissed. Petition dismissed.